This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Warning: active arbitration remedies
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)
@Eccekevin restored a former description of an anecdote Steel related, and relocated it to the personal-life section. I think these changes are misguided, as follows:
The anecdote is utterly non-notable with respect to Steel's personal life, which in any case is minimal in this article. Illustrating Steel's strong prejudice against marriage equality is what makes the anecdote notable, viz: she was so offended by her college daughter's support for marriage equality that she transferred her daughter to another college. Absent that aspect, there is no reason to include it. Thus the anecdote belongs in the section describing her position on LBGTQ rights.
The editor wanted to restore a brief quote using the word "brainwash". This distracts from the point and is unfair to boot. There are reliable sources documenting her prejudice against marriage equality, her anecdote illustrates the strength of her opposition congruent with what sources say. There are no sources documenting Steel taking positions in favor of brainwashing. It merely an artless phrase she used once. I think people like to include the word for "har har, yuk yuk" value, making fun of an artless phrase from a non-native speaker of English. And it distracts from the power of the story.
Thank you. I'm not 100% persuaded that this anecdote is particularly encyclopedia-worthy, but people have added it several times. So I figured I'd try to do it properly. -- M.boli (talk) 16:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this content is particularly encyclopedic. It's a one off comment she made at an event a decade ago. It doesn't appear to have come up again or received sustained coverage. It's about her daughter, who AFAICT is not notable in her own right, so I don't see the point in including her educational history. Marquardtika (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This anecdote is salient to nothing else in this article. Which is why it keeps getting shoehorned into the personal life section. It to be an example of WP:ILIKEIT, as the only articulated reason for inclusion is that some sources reported it. -- M.boli (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While Michelle Steel's daughter is not notable, this story is about Michelle Steel's conduct which she herself revealed (so there is no dispute about it, nor any issues with regards to privacy). It came up in 2020 (i.e. six years after she made the comment) and picked up by two different LGBT publications ([1] and [2]).
It to be an example of WP:ILIKEIT, as the only articulated reason for inclusion is that some sources reported it.
It really seems like the inverse to me. It was a noteworthy controversy at the time that was picked up by reliable sources. How is this less noteworthy or encyclopedic than other elements of her personal life? Go through "Good Article" biographies and you'll see the inclusion of many quotes or actions that have generated controversy throughout people's lives. Soapwort (talk) 04:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't rise to the level of a controversy. It was a comment she made one time at an event a decade ago. There has been no sustained coverage. Marquardtika (talk) 16:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The two sources both reported the anecdote as illustrating an anti-LBGTQ view. It later appears in opponents' campaign material for the same purpose. It doesn't appear anywhere as a noteworthy component of her personal life, or for any other reason. If Steel were an anti-LBGTQ activist, perhaps introducing bills or regularly inveighing, then this anecdote would naturally and properly belong in the section describing her advocacy on that issue. Instead it was gratuitously shoehorned into the personal life section because there is no place in this article where it belongs. It is irrelevant. -- M.boli (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If Steel were an anti-LBGTQ activist, perhaps introducing bills or regularly inveighing, then this anecdote would naturally and properly belong in the section describing her advocacy on that issue": She is. The article says that she voted against the Respect for Marriage Act. But I don't think this belongs there because this is part of her personal life, which she thought needs to be shared with the people at the event, not thinking it may be recorded for posterity. It's important to note that it is presented as is without any commentary nor criticism that what she did "illustrat[es] an anti-LBGTQ view". It's what she said that she chose to do with her daughter. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 13:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then read the damned sources which you linked to. They both are extremely clear this point: anecdote was reported to illustrate anti-LBGTQ attitudes. The articles are not reportage on Steel's home and family life.
There is no separate section on anti-LBGTQ activism in this Wikipedia article because she hasn't been notable in that area. Yes, she voted against a civil rights act. But 168 other Representatives also voted against the Respect for Marriage act, they aren't all notable anti-LBGTQ activists. Repeating myself: if such opposition becomes a noteworthy part of Steel's activities, there will be a section on that in her Wikipedia article, and this anecdote with references will likely be a part of it. Absent that it is simply ludicrous to insist this is an encyclopedia-worthy story from Steel's personal family life. -- M.boli (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there sustained coverage about her being Christian or fluent in Japanese? This isn’t a metric for whether something should be included. Soapwort (talk) 08:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is simply not encyclopedia worthy. It's a random comment from the past that was seized upon by her opponents. We should stick to her actual voting record on LGBT issues. Marquardtika (talk) 15:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But what aspects of the subjects's personal life are included in an encyclopedia article? How does once had a tiff with a child about college get included along with marriages, residence, etc. that these sections are made of? I think we are back to ILIKEIT. -- M.boli (talk) 23:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it was that notable, it would have received more coverage, including in the ten years since it was said. Politicians say lots of things. We don't repeat them all here, we give summaries of their positions over time. Marquardtika (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But yet you have still not provided any evidence that this is a noteworthy aspect of her personal life, beyond it was published and you like it. It is tied to nothing. And you put it back in the article after failing to obtain a consensus for doing so. -- M.boli (talk) 15:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We may be at an impasse here as there look to be two editors supporting inclusion and two editors opposing inclusion. Perhaps an RFC would help us achieve a clearer consensus? Marquardtika (talk) 19:06, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
